McCarthy v Planning Minister [2007] JLR 167 (12 March 2007)
- Citation
- [2007] JLR 167
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Planning Appeal / Judgment
More details
- Posture
- Planning Appeal / Judgment
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Minister is not bound by preliminary favourable representations; legitimate expectation rarely applies in planning appeals. The court must consider if refusal is unreasonable due to appellant's detrimental reliance, but mere expenses on plans and applications do not constitute serious detriment, whereas purchase of property in reliance may do so.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
02
Material facts
Parties
McCarthy
AppellantPlanning Minister
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Planning Appeal / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Minister is bound by preliminary favourable representations in planning matters
- 02
Applicability of the doctrine of legitimate expectation to planning appeals
- 03
Assessment of detriment suffered by appellant relying on representations
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant relied on favourable representations by the Minister and acted to their detriment; refusal of permission is unfair.
- Respondent
- Minister is not bound by preliminary representations; doctrine of legitimate expectation rarely applies in planning appeals.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
[2007] JLR 167
Minister is not bound by preliminary favourable representations in planning matters.
- 02
[2007] JLR 167
Doctrine of legitimate expectation is rarely applicable to planning appeals; court should consider reasonableness of inconsistent refusal, focusing on detriment suffered by appellant.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Minister is not bound by preliminary favourable representations; legitimate expectation rarely applies in planning appeals. The court must consider if refusal is unreasonable due to appellant's detrimental reliance, but mere expenses on plans and applications do not constitute serious detriment, whereas purchase of property in reliance may do so.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [
DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:
BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> McCarthy v Planning Minister [2007] JLR 167 (12 March 2007) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2007/JLR070167.html Cite as: [2007] JLR 167 [ New search ] [ Help ] McCarthy v Planning Minister 2007 JLR 167 (12 March 2007) Planning Law-planning permission-preliminary favourable representation-Minister not bound by favourable representations-doctrine of legitimate expectation rarely applicable to planning appeals-court instead to consider reasonableness of inconsistent refusal of permission, i.e. if appellant acted to detriment on representations so that refusal unfair-expenses of plans and applications not serious detriment, but purchase of property in reliance may be The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2007 JLR 167 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2007/JLR070167.html
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.